Search Forums

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Obama has failed to deliver promised transparency and open government.

Obama's party has lost both houses of Congress, holding the fewest seats since, well, maybe ever, along with state legislatures across the country, in a repudiation of the President and liberal policies.

There's more, no doubt, but that is enough for now.

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

And while some of the points here are certainly true, I'm not sure if it qualifies as a failed presidency. I certainly thinks it's premature since he still has time left !

If you want to look at what a failed presidency looks like, take the previous President. He broke the economy, put the world on the path of we are on now with the Middle East, and did nothing domestically to speak of other than his non action on social issues and his disastrous handling of Katrina, and his removal our rights to privacy and legitimizing torture is a direct and permanent attack on Americans. At least Obama did something about one of them but made the other worse.

This isn't to say that Obama's couldn't also be a total failure either but let's put things in perspective and at the right time.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Why he is not a failed president
Obama has started no wars (though he has been involved in some).
The economy has greatly improved under his watch from a very sorry state it started at.
There have been no great social upheavals.
He passed major healthcare legislation.

Why he is a failed president
Many of his objectives were not met
The opposition party has captured congress

Stuff neither here nor there
Foreign relations are definitely not good, but neither are they especially bad.
Social progress on gay rights and legalization of marijuana but none of that is really his doing.
Business as usual in the financial and private sector and issues of income inequality and debt.

But the percentage of working age Americans in the workforce is up since the recession started and Obama took office. A lot of people are retiring due to demographics so this number will continue to go down no matter who is president.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Originally Posted by SIG

Obama has started no wars (though he has been involved in some).

This is not a "win" necessarily. It is not inherently good to not start wars or not get involved in any.
Suppose America had never entered WWII, that would have been a gross failure on our leaders part. (granted that is being in a war, not starting one)

But consider The first gulf war, that would have been a negative had we not stopped Hussein then. (I could argue the second Gulf war as well, but won't)

Originally Posted by SIG

Stuff neither here nor there
Foreign relations are definitely not good, but neither are they especially bad.
Social progress on gay rights and legalization of marijuana but none of that is really his doing.
Business as usual in the financial and private sector and issues of income inequality and debt.

You can't say not starting a war is a measure of success, and then say that foreign relations are not relevant. Alienating allies and allowing ideological enemies to gain ground is a loss. Especially if it is due to poor handling, or negligence. I would say that at least Isreal has been poorly handled if not simply due to negligence on the presidents part. It may not of itself be enough to say he has "failed".

Originally Posted by SIG

The economy has greatly improved under his watch from a very sorry state it started at.

We are still recovering from his shut down of all drilling for his hamfisted reasoning. That is on him.

Originally Posted by JJ

And while some of the points here are certainly true, I'm not sure if it qualifies as a failed presidency. I certainly thinks it's premature since he still has time left !

He has had 6 years to judge him on, so it is hardly premature to start talking about it.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Originally Posted by MindTrap028

This is not a "win" necessarily. It is not inherently good to not start wars or not get involved in any.
Suppose America had never entered WWII, that would have been a gross failure on our leaders part. (granted that is being in a war, not starting one)

War is sometimes necessary but never good. You want to avoid war and any president that warmongers or starts wars we don't need to be in is a fail in my book. WWII was necessary, WWI somewhat, most of the others are failures of good leadership. I certainly feel differently than many people on this account. (and keep in mind this comes from a guy who's primary hobbies are essentially playing at warfare of one kind or another)

But consider The first gulf war, that would have been a negative had we not stopped Hussein then. (I could argue the second Gulf war as well, but won't)

The horror of Kuwait not selling us oil? What exactly was the danger to us other than high gas prices?

You can't say not starting a war is a measure of success, and then say that foreign relations are not relevant.

The kind of relations we are talking about are low level diplomatic rancor and public opinion based on economic policies. No one is shooting at one another here. China and the US wrangle over a lot of things, generally have, generally will. Same goes for Russia. I grew up under the cold war, this kind of rancor is nothing in terms of how serious the stakes are.

Alienating allies and allowing ideological enemies to gain ground is a loss. Especially if it is due to poor handling, or negligence. I would say that at least Isreal has been poorly handled if not simply due to negligence on the presidents part. It may not of itself be enough to say he has "failed".

How exactly? Is Israel a threat to us? (no) Are they suffering because of our policies? (no) All that is happening is the Israeli leader doesn't think we are doing things the way he would want us to. I can handle some disagreement and so can the country. Its not like they are going to turn on us or we are going to let them be destroyed. Simply arguing about policy isn't hurting anyone.

We are still recovering from his shut down of all drilling for his hamfisted reasoning. That is on him.

LOL, ya because during his presidency we haven't vastly increased our oil production to where we are the single largest producer in the world. We're dying over here!!!

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Originally Posted by Sigfried

Why he is not a failed president
Obama has started no wars (though he has been involved in some).
The economy has greatly improved under his watch from a very sorry state it started at.
There have been no great social upheavals.
He passed major healthcare legislation.

Why he is a failed president
Many of his objectives were not met
The opposition party has captured congress

Stuff neither here nor there
Foreign relations are definitely not good, but neither are they especially bad.
Social progress on gay rights and legalization of marijuana but none of that is really his doing.
Business as usual in the financial and private sector and issues of income inequality and debt.

But the percentage of working age Americans in the workforce is up since the recession started and Obama took office. A lot of people are retiring due to demographics so this number will continue to go down no matter who is president.

Really? First, let me say I don't think we can properly assess whether Obama is a good or bad President for another ten years. I don't think we get proper vision and perspective of how well a President does while he's still in office. Now, I do predict historically, he'll be known as America's first black President. That's about it. Which is to say, that if he were white, he'd probably be considered among the poorer Presidents. This, though, is my wild ass guess.

I judge Presidents by a very narrow prism. I don't give a rip on whether they support gay marriage or other, generally, state/local issues. Obama has no impact on gay marriage, abortion, or all the other issues aimed at morons who are easily distracted by shiny things held up by sheatbag politicians. Much like Clinton screaming about women's issues.. Sheesh! What a bunch of crap. Obama, when it came to executive leadership has generally failed. He didn't inspire the nation behind a common goal. He generally ceded leadership on the world stage to anyone else willing to take it. He showed no leadership with Congress. He apparently thought some high profile town halls with Congress was a sign of leadership because, I think, in his role of community organizer, that's what he was expected to do. Yet, he could not form relationships with the people in his own party, let alone the people on the other side of the aisle. We can blame Republicans for being obstinate, but the bottom line is that Obama campaigned for the job, won the job, and then failed to do the job. No one would blame Bill Gates's VP of operations if Microsoft crumbled. We'd all blame Gates no matter what sort of infighting or whatever else he had to overcome. That's the responsibility placed on leaders or those who wish to be considered as such. Obama's distaste for politics has been well-documented. Unfortunately, his job was to be the #1 politician in America. Reagan worked with Tipper. Clinton worked with Hastert and Gingrich. In the history of U.S. Presidents, it is no secret that historians tend to give both high marks. Bush I was the last true statesman that this country has elected and demonstrated leadership a little differently, but lost an election because he compromised with a Democrat Congress showing he could work across the aisle. Bush II had his moments of leadership and then had moments of WTF... Obama, though, generally has been just kind of absent as both a statesman and a leader. He couldn't get immigration reform done when his party controlled all three branches of govt. He got bogged down in health care which turned out so incredibly mangled and ill-conceived that it will be interesting to see if it will be considered his legacy or an albatross.

That is my absolutely objective opinion on Presidential success. Notice, I am not harping on which of his policies I liked or didn't like. Doesn't matter. Presidents come and go and so do their policies. All a President can really bring is zeitgeist. Does the President make Americans feel optimism? Does he present America across the world with strength in a manner which protects our international and national interests? Maybe that means going to war. Maybe that means staying home. No one here is smart enough to properly predict how Obama's signature of (insert legislation here) will impact people in 5.. 10.. or 15 years from now. It is just impossible. All we can assess is whether he exhibited skills as a leader that gave Americans a sense that they were better off today then they were eight years ago. And yes, this comes from policy to some degree, but it also comes from communication and tone. Reagan didn't get us into a war when he could have. He dropped some bombs, made some strong statements, and showed confidence. It worked. Americans felt vindicated and strong. He pushed the right buttons at the right time. It is as much an art as it is a skill. I know I compare prostitutes to politicians a lot on this website, and to all prostitutes I apologize, but they are really both very similar. There job is to make you feel good about yourself. She may not give a great blow job, but it is professional and competent and she is unapologetic for it. That's, minimally, what we want from a President. We want competence and professionalism and strength. Obama exhibited none of these qualities on anything close to a consistent basis. How many times did we hear that he was informed of some scandal from the news? Seriously? Most powerful guy in the world and he gets every breaking story from CNN? Not exactly inspiring is it? He has been kinda like under-cooked oatmeal. You hope for something familiar and palatable, but it is just dry and not at all fulfilling.

The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Originally Posted by SIG

The horror of Kuwait not selling us oil? What exactly was the danger to us other than high gas prices?

Well, if you have no problem with brutal dictators that us WMD's taking over a democratic country.. sure no place for us at all.
But then, why be for WWII? That was all in Europ, they were never going to come over and kill Americans. What lives we did lose is just the price of commerce while everyone else is at war.
Just like our oilfield workers being kidnapped and killed in hostile countries that we drill in.

Move along, nothing to see.

Originally Posted by SIG

The kind of relations we are talking about are low level diplomatic rancor and public opinion based on economic policies. No one is shooting at one another here. China and the US wrangle over a lot of things, generally have, generally will. Same goes for Russia. I grew up under the cold war, this kind of rancor is nothing in terms of how serious the stakes are.

Well, if there are steaks, then I am all for it. Just as long as there is a bit of A1 near by.

Seriously, I am fine with that assessment. It's low level, however it is still a degrading of what was before.
That is a negative and not irrelevant.

Originally Posted by SIG

How exactly? Is Israel a threat to us? (no) Are they suffering because of our policies? (no) All that is happening is the Israeli leader doesn't think we are doing things the way he would want us to. I can handle some disagreement and so can the country. Its not like they are going to turn on us or we are going to let them be destroyed. Simply arguing about policy isn't hurting anyone.

Well, that would be something that isn't really in the pres control or a result of his direct actions.
So it shouldn't be used to grade him. The tone and "get alongness" is especially in regards to Israel.

Originally Posted by SIG

LOL, ya because during his presidency we haven't vastly increased our oil production to where we are the single largest producer in the world. We're dying over here!!!

I meant the south that depends on an open state gulf leases to drill, not the Midwest drilling on private lands.

and we(IE me and our local economy) are not dying, and things have improved but there are plenty still dealing with the financial fall out. You can hardly go a whole year without income without having long lasting effects.

So please don't confuse me for speaking to our total oil production (something that exists at current levels despite Obama).
the whole affair is as black an eye on obama as Katrina was for Bush. Only Obama's mistake was self inflicted. I went through both, and my opinion is that the latter was worse.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Really? First, let me say I don't think we can properly assess whether Obama is a good or bad President for another ten years.

I basically agree with that but it doesn't stop me from having a preliminary take on it.

I think most of your analysis is pretty good. Personally I'm often more interested in policy and culture than politics and leadership. (though being a leader is more or less my job these days). I like him, can be pretty good at inspiring people directly who are already aligned with us, and being inspirational to random people on the outside, but struggle at persuading people who don't agree to go along with our plans.

It is hard to get past the thought "You should want to help me because I'm right."

Well, if you have no problem with brutal dictators that us WMD's taking over a democratic country.. sure no place for us at all.
But then, why be for WWII? That was all in Europ, they were never going to come over and kill Americans. What lives we did lose is just the price of commerce while everyone else is at war.
Just like our oilfield workers being kidnapped and killed in hostile countries that we drill in.

Brutal dictators are killing people in many places in the world right now. They just don't have quite so much oil. It is one thing to make a treaty with another nation and agree that you will defend one another as allies. It is a mutual relationship of trust and defense and you should honor it. But running about selectively defending nations when you feel like it and not when you don't isn't real foreign policy, just opportunism.

Look, the first Gulf war was handled pretty well as wars go, but I don't think anything significant was gained from it. Saddam was a largely secular and stabilizing leader who happened to thumb his nose at us a lot. While I'm glad he is gone, I can't say the world is all that much better a place for it. We have not really fixed anything by our involvement in that region. We can go and blow things up and we can kill people but we can't force these people to live with and accept one another which is what is really needed.

WWII was very different. We had direct allies under attack and we ourselves were threatened and later attacked directly. We had all the justification in the world for that effort and we were cautious about getting involved in it until that was crystal clear. And when we did we commuted to the effort completely.

I meant the south that depends on an open state gulf leases to drill, not the Midwest drilling on private lands.

If they want to drill on public land they shouldn't be making such a mess of it. There are consequences to actions. If they can show that they can drill without damaging the public land, then they can do so. The president is sworn to protect federal property among other things. That a specific irresponsible industry is impacted I won't shed any tears over it.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Originally Posted by Sigfried

I basically agree with that but it doesn't stop me from having a preliminary take on it.

I think most of your analysis is pretty good. Personally I'm often more interested in policy and culture than politics and leadership. (though being a leader is more or less my job these days). I like him, can be pretty good at inspiring people directly who are already aligned with us, and being inspirational to random people on the outside, but struggle at persuading people who don't agree to go along with our plans.

It is hard to get past the thought "You should want to help me because I'm right."

Of course. Opine away. I really needn't have quoted your post. I was going to directly rebut it then realized how silly I was being.

In terms of leadership, I think you hit a hugely important component. Being a leader does not preclude having an ego. No one accused Steve Jobs of being modest. It is often about relationships and reputation.

Consider football coaches. Bill Belicheck and Joe Philbin both coach professional football teams. You may have heard of one them. The other, unless you are a die-hard NFL fan or a Dolphin fan, not so much. Let's suppose both trade a first round draft pick for a controversial linebacker. Let's suppose the LB turns out to be a bust. Which coach is more likely to get fired? Let's even go back a little. Which coach is more likely to be able to convince the GM to make the deal? Reputation goes a long way. And let's face, Obama really didn't have an established reputation when he came to office. So, he couldn't really do things like an Eisenhower who had built up a lot of cache with the American people.

There is the other factor to also consider, relationships. Leaders, even if they do not have a reputation, can win with relationships. Going back to our football analogy, look at Pete Carrol. Here's a guy who came into Seattle after a less than stellar stint with the Jets. Yes, he had a great won at USC, but pro coaches are measured by NFL wins, not NCAA championships. Still, Caroll convinced his team owner to allow him to revamp the entire roster and draft a QB that many scouts were mixed on, Russel Wilson. Pete Carolls personality and his ability to build relationships allows him to be a great leader. Of course, now he also has a reputation. Obama, as I noted, has shown an inability to build relationships. His personality is not dynamic.

Then, I think there is a third quality, which is something innate and probably something you are born with or not. That is timing. Obama, frankly, does not have it. There is a kind of pulse of America that a leader can take and Obama's finger is squarely up his butt... I guess if you consider how intrusive some of policies are, it may be apt to say his finger is up the American public's butt. I think he is more like the proctologist in chief than an actual leader.

So, in terms of leadership qualities, Obama really strikes out in the two defining traits of a leader. In his case,

The U.S. is currently enduring a zombie apocalypse. However, in a strange twist, the zombie's are starving.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Brutal dictators are killing people in many places in the world right now. They just don't have quite so much oil

I'm sorry, did you say "oil".. as in the resource which our nation depends. IE our NATIONAL INTEREST?
Are you saying we had national interests there to protect?

Originally Posted by SIG

But running about selectively defending nations when you feel like it and not when you don't isn't real foreign policy, just opportunism.

So, defending natural resources and their stability is not a national interest, it is opportunism?
Nope, not buying it.

Originally Posted by SIG

Look, the first Gulf war was handled pretty well as wars go, but I don't think anything significant was gained from it. Saddam was a largely secular and stabilizing leader who happened to thumb his nose at us a lot. While I'm glad he is gone, I can't say the world is all that much better a place for it. We have not really fixed anything by our involvement in that region. We can go and blow things up and we can kill people but we can't force these people to live with and accept one another which is what is really needed.

Well, if you remember sadam was still in place after the first war, it wasn't until the He claimed to have WMD's and thumbed his nose as the world (Ie breaking numerous post war agreements) was a state supporter of terrorism that for SOME stupid reason became a world concern that we had the second war which removed him. Yea, it didn't turn out so well, but that was mostly the fault of a madman not an irresponsible U.S gov.

Originally Posted by SIG

If they want to drill on public land they shouldn't be making such a mess of it. There are consequences to actions. If they can show that they can drill without damaging the public land, then they can do so. The president is sworn to protect federal property among other things. That a specific irresponsible industry is impacted I won't shed any tears over it.

Quite right, because Obama only prohibited those companies that were being irresponsible from drilling (Sarcasm)
No, then entire industry was shut down, what you are saying is equivalent to Obama outlawing all loans because one bank was irresponsible. It is a ludicrous standard and you are incorrect in forwarding it as a justification.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Originally Posted by MindTrap028

I'm sorry, did you say "oil".. as in the resource which our nation depends. IE our NATIONAL INTEREST?
Are you saying we had national interests there to protect?
So, defending natural resources and their stability is not a national interest, it is opportunism?
Nope, not buying it.

Beating up other nations and taking their stuff is not justified by the fact we want their stuff. It is indeed opportunism. Those natural resources do not belong to us.

Well, if you remember sadam was still in place after the first war, it wasn't until the He claimed to have WMD's and thumbed his nose as the world (Ie breaking numerous post war agreements) was a state supporter of terrorism that for SOME stupid reason became a world concern that we had the second war which removed him. Yea, it didn't turn out so well, but that was mostly the fault of a madman not an irresponsible U.S gov.

Except that he was not largely a supporter of terrorism compared to many of our so called allies in the region. Don't forget the 911 conspiracy really originated in Saudi Arabia and the groups that did it originated in Afghan groups that we ourselves bankrolled heavily. Sadam was largely suppressing groups like these in his own country as they represented a threat to his regime. Iran is far more active in supporting insurgents and we didn't invade them. Saddam denied having WMDs many times leading up to the invasion. He didn't boast about them.

Quite right, because Obama only prohibited those companies that were being irresponsible from drilling (Sarcasm)
No, then entire industry was shut down, what you are saying is equivalent to Obama outlawing all loans because one bank was irresponsible. It is a ludicrous standard and you are incorrect in forwarding it as a justification.

He set new safety standards. If you want to drill you have to meet them including proving you can clean up a spill. They do issue new permits though the numbers are way down due to the requirements. There hasn't been an outright ban since 2011.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Originally Posted by SIG

Beating up other nations and taking their stuff is not justified by the fact we want their stuff. It is indeed opportunism. Those natural resources do not belong to us.

Relevance? because that isn't what happened. We went and PROTECTED someone else stuff from a person doing exactly what you are decrying. Your story is not strait. Which way do you want it? because you are going both ways right now.

Originally Posted by SIG

Except that he was not largely a supporter of terrorism compared to many of our so called allies in the region. Don't forget the 911 conspiracy really originated in Saudi Arabia and the groups that did it originated in Afghan groups that we ourselves bankrolled heavily. Sadam was largely suppressing groups like these in his own country as they represented a threat to his regime. Iran is far more active in supporting insurgents and we didn't invade them. Saddam denied having WMDs many times leading up to the invasion. He didn't boast about them.

He represented a nation that was widely thought to have WMD's (and did end up having some very old WMD's in the end) and was thought to be willing to sell them to terrorists, above and beyond his ILLEGAL thumbing of his nose to his conquerors and the rules set up (which were for a reason) that caused the end of the first war.
If he doesn't agree, then we would have continued to crush him. Those pesky reasons for having inspectors that he ejected took on new significance in a world at war with terrorists.

Are there others? It is an Irrelevant question or point.

Originally Posted by SIG

He set new safety standards. If you want to drill you have to meet them including proving you can clean up a spill. They do issue new permits though the numbers are way down due to the requirements. There hasn't been an outright ban since 2011.

No, he shut it down for at time. Don't give me the permit argument. They freaked out, and shut all new drilling down. There was no punishing the specific irresponsible party (as you failed to argue earlier). They weren't issuing permits to people who legitimately qualified.. they shut it down for a time.
I am specifically talking about 2011, that effected me and has lingering effects and was directly from the Pres.

What exactly is meant by the phrase 'failed Presidency'? By what metric are we gauging failure? What would constitute a 'Pass'?

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:— “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”

Pass or fail for a President rests mostly on issues of greater importance to the long-term position of the United States in the world, and through that, to the betterment of the lives of American citizens. Next is how well the President preserves, protects and defends the Constitution of the United States. Following those are the more subjective and partisan politics along with the ideology a President tries to advance as head of his party, which are unofficial roles found nowhere in the Constitution.

Originally Posted by Sigfried

But the percentage of working age Americans in the workforce is up since the recession started and Obama took office.

Support this claim, please.

Last edited by evensaul; March 14th, 2015 at 10:36 AM.

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Originally Posted by evensaul

Pass or fail for a President rests mostly on issues of greater importance to the long-term position of the United States in the world, and through that, to the betterment of the lives of American citizens.

What is the long-term position of the United States? Regardless of how you would answer that question, is that not a matter of perspective and opinion?

Furthermore, how can one properly evaluate long-term effects of a Presidency when it hasn't even ended yet?

Originally Posted by evensaul

Next is how well the President preserves, protects and defends the Constitution of the United States.

Another subjective metric. Unless the President is acting unconstitutionally, I can't see how this is meaningful at all.

Originally Posted by evensaul

Following those are the more subjective and partisan politics along with the ideology a President tries to advance as head of his party, which are unofficial roles found nowhere in the Constitution.

This grading system has been nothing but subjective speculation. You pick and choose items that fit your ideological narrative in the same manner that Fox News and MSNBC Analysts do and ignore the rest.

Nothing new has been learned here--I expected you to disagree with the President's actions because your track record here has largely been intolerant to political views that differ from yours. If you wanted to actually make a case, you're going to have to put forward an argument instead of a mere opinion.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Sure, this kind of debate is inherently subjective, similar to debates ODN has seen about who were the best or worst presidents. But facts can be presented to support subjective opinions, making some positions stronger than others. That happens all the time here.

So, would you like to offer an opinion on Obama's grade?

"If we lose freedom here, there is no place to escape to. This is the last stand on Earth." - Ronald Reagan

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

But the percentage of working age Americans in the workforce is up since the recession started and Obama took office.

Originally Posted by evensaul

Support this claim, please.

Can I un-support Sig's claim?

Although the US unemployment rate has declined, more and more Americans are choosing to opt out of the labor market altogether and no longer even figure in the employment data.

Efforts by the Obama administration to dress up the employment picture are a bit like attempting to stuff a circus elephant into a ballerina costume. As Washington trumpets last month’s drop in the unemployment rate (6.3 percent), it has quietly moved more than 988,000 Americans into the “not participating in the labor force” column.

If you add the current number of Americans without a job (9.75 million) to the number of US citizens not in the labor force (92.02), you come up with 101.77 million working age Americans who do not have work, according to data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Now compare that figure to April 2000, when 5.48 million Americans were unemployed and 69.27 million Americans were not participating in the labor market. The number of Americans 14 years ago without work was 74.75 million. That means that the number of working age Americans without a job has risen by 27 million since the year 2000. However Washington wishes to fudge data that is bad news for the Obama administration.

Re: Obama's Is A Failed Presidency

Originally Posted by evensaul

Sure, this kind of debate is inherently subjective, similar to debates ODN has seen about who were the best or worst presidents . . . That happens all the time here.

...and I think it's absolutely pointless and idiotic. Hard-nose conservatives who disliked the President from day one claim that his presidency is a failure. Hard-nose liberals defend the President no matter what. Then a President is elected from the opposite party and the cycle begins again, only now the hard-nose conservatives are defending 'their' President no matter what and hard-nose liberals claim that the Presidency is a failure. No meaningful discussion ever takes place because it's all about the BS 'standards' used to 'grade' a President (even though Presidents don't get grades, they get elected) without the benefit of hindsight.

Originally Posted by evensaul

So, would you like to offer an opinion on Obama's grade?

I think Obama's earned three golden burritos in Foreign Policy, ten silver-dollar pancakes for his Domestic Policy, one Hungry-Hungry hippo for his ability to shoot hoops, and a "Duuuuude!" for his late-night talk show appearances.